On 2025-12-10 5:19 am, Ashish Mhetre wrote:
[...]

Hi Robin, Nic,
We removed ACPI dependency in Kconfig but driver still depends
on ACPI for these functions. I will be protecting ACPIspecific
tegra241-cmdqv code under CONFIG_ACPI similar to what is done
in arm-smmu-v3 driver. Is this the correct thing to do or do you
have any other suggestions?

Yes, when I commented that "depends on ACPI || OF" was functionally the 
same as just removing "depends on ACPI", I didn't mean to suggest that 
wasn't necessarily a genuine dependency still.

I guess if you can wrap the ACPI-specific functions in a single #ifdef 
block that's reasonable, however I do now wonder whether things couldn't 
be factored out a bit more - if it's a standard DSDT/SSDT namespace 
device, shouldn't there also be a corresponding platform device created 
for it, which we could look up instead of delving directly into the _CRS 
of the ACPI node itself? (not sure off-hand if there's a straightforward 
inverse of ACPI_COMPANION()...)

Thanks,
Robin.